The Australian Gender Report for May 2006.

Submitted by Editor on Wed, 31/05/2006 - 22:38

Compiled by Alan Barron, Convenor, The Institute of Men's Studies, Grovedale Victoria Australia.

Disclaimer: The opinions of writers in this newsletter do not necessarily reflect that of the Institute. As a general policy we seek to publish articles which are pro-family, and which uphold traditional/Christian values, and are also respectful of others opinions and beliefs.

Send date: Wednesday 31st 2006.
Alan Barron

Odd spot

India: As part of a woman’s empowerment campaign, men in Bihar State could face up to three years in gaol if they are caught drinking without written permission from their wives.
(The Australian Rechabite, March 2006, page 2.)

This months Dumb and Dumber award:

It was disappointing to read in The Age newspaper this month (Tuesday 9/5/06) Farah Farouque’s article captioned, `One for boomers, breeders and PM's heartland.’ Whether it was the journalist herself, or an Age sub-editor, who used the word “breeders” to describe parents, was disappointing and could be construed by many as offensive. One wonders if Ms Farouque is a parent herself, as it’s highly unlikely she would talk about herself in such a manner.
The Age appears to want to disenfranchise a whole class of Australians who contribute to our national well being through personal sacrifice in raising the next generation. The pejorative term `breeders’ is regularly used by the homosexual and lesbian community to disparage heterosexual parents. There is no place in a respected publication for such sloppy journalism. Come on Age, lift your game.

News Items

* Bid to stamp out male suicide by 2030
* Education- Why Gender Matters
* Feminism alive and well in English Lit Classes


* NZ: Fewer Kiwis saying 'I do'
* NZ: Girls chant 'kill him' in attack on driver
* Anti-depressant suicide risk up five times for seniors
* USA: Divorce drops a person's wealth by 77 percent
* USA: Men are More Likely Than Women to Be Victims in Dating Violence
* Turkey: Judge killed over women

Comment pieces

* Book Review: Why Gender Matters Reviewed by Mary Ward Menke - Are men smarter than women?

* Are Women Earning More Than Men? By Warren Farrell

* Has Matriarchy made the sexes equal? By Carey Roberts

* Research shows how hormones wire minds of men, women By Ronald Kotulak

* Humour: 13 differences between men and women

News Items

Bid to stamp out male suicide by 2030
The Australian,
3 May 2006,
as reported on Manumit Exchange, 4/5/06
Full report:

A national suicide forum has ended in Sydney today with a bold plan to stamp out male suicide by 2030. Research shows that every day five men take their life in Australia. Of the more than 2000 suicides each year, 80 per cent were male. In 2004 more than 1,600 men committed suicide, compared to 430 women.

The inaugural National Forum on Men and Suicide wrapped up with a commitment to tackle the tragedy of male suicide. The Mental Health Council of Australia said that, with governments turning their attention to the mental health crisis, now was the time to address suicide prevention. "The forum has laid the foundation for fundamental change in the way Australian society deals with men and suicide," said the council's chief executive, John Mendoza.

"The forum set out a clear long term-goal that by 2030 all Australians will know what actions to take individually and collectively to prevent suicide. "The bold plan developed by the forum aims that, in one generation, suicide will no longer exist as a health risk for men."

Suicide prevention required an assertive, well-resourced, long-term campaign, Mr Mendoza said. Professor Ian Webster from the National Advisory Council on Suicide Prevention said attention to men's mental health and emotional wellbeing was long overdue. "Male suicide is one of the great tragedies of Australia today (and) that is completely unacceptable," Prof Webster said.

Note: The federal government has allocated $1.8 billion to mental health funding some of which will go towards rebuilding the National Suicide Prevention Strategy, which receives about $10 million in annual federal funding.

Education- Why Gender Matters

Why Gender Matters: What Parents and Teachers Need to Know about the Emerging Science of Sex Differences
Blanche Clark,
Herald Sun, Learn, p. 35,
Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Co-educational schools will always short-change both girls and boys, says American Dr Leonard Sax. The author of Why Gender Matters: What Parents and Teachers Need to Know about the Emerging Science of Sex Differences is adamant that single-sex education is best. A family physician and psychologist, Sax says research shows differences between girls and boys are hard-wired.

“Boys and girls are born seeing the world very differently. Their eyes are built differently they hear differently because their ears are built differently,” he says. A typical teenage girl has a sense of hearing seven times more acute than a teenage boy and boys respond better to a booming male voice than girls do, he says.

“The best temperature for a room for a girl to learn in is about 3C higher than the best temperature for a boy.” Boys learn best standing and moving and girls learn best sitting because of differences in their cardio-vascular systems, Sax says. Sax has reviewed scientific research and applied the findings to the educational setting.

He was in Australia as a guest of Lauriston Girls’ School in Kew and spoke to about 420 parents at the school last Thursday. He says regions in the brain develop at different times in girls and boys. “In girls the language areas of the brain develop before the areas used for spatial relations and geometry. In boys, it’s the reverse,” he says.

“If people aren’t aware of these differences, by the age of 12, girls will tell you maths is hard and boys will say poetry is a waste of time. “Teaching them things at the wrong time will only serve to reinforce the stereotypes.” He says boys are being subjected to books and assignments in a co-education setting that are inappropriate to their learning needs. He says boys should be reading Treasure Island rather than The Handmaid’s Tale.

Sax says he has infuriated American feminists, including National Organisation for Women president Kim Gandy. “(She said) the notion that there are any hard-wired differences between boys and girls is simply unreconstructed chauvinism and creates a hierarchy in which men will continue to dominate the women.”

But he says it’s about making sure both sexes reach their full potential. “Differences do not imply an order of rank…(it) doesn’t mean that boys are better or girls are better,” he says. Carey Baptist Grammar School principal Phil De Young, however, is equally ardent about co-education.

“We would argue the case that there are far more similarities between the genders than there are differences,” he says. “We can see no argument why you should segregate the genders in an educational setting, when society doesn’t segregate them in workplace environments.”

De Young says one of the problems facing our society is the breakdown of relationships. “…one of the most important things that we do as educationalists is to assist kids with forming relationships with each other at school and beyond school,” he says. Carey deputy principal Elisabeth Lenders says Sax is taking a purely biological view.

“It’s important to understand that education happens in a social context,” she says. Lenders says that Sax’s view that boys are ready to learn maths sooner ignores research that shows great disparity between boys. ”Though you find a high proportion of boys at the top end of mathematics, you also find a larger number of boys at the bottom of the mathematics spectrum,” she says.

As for Sax’s views on literature, Lenders says both boys and girls should read widely. De Young and Lenders say probably the greatest influence on results and improvement is the quality of the teachers. Lauriston Girls’ principal Meg Hansen says Sax’s visit was part of the school’s bid to keep abreast of the latest research and ideas about single-sex education.

“Probably one of the most compelling pieces of research was that girls don’t like to take risks, not just physical, but intellectual risks as well,” Hansen says. “That was a very powerful thing for this school with our Howqua campus (near Mansfield), where we are asking girls to take risks within a supportive environment. It was good for us to understand that what we were doing with girls has a scientific basis.”

Hansen says the school community will spend a few weeks reflecting on Sax’s views. “We’re not saying he’s right, he’s the guru…it’s more about how we might test these ideas and how we might apply them.”

Feminism alive and well in English Lit Classes
By Baden Eunson ,
The Age (Melbourne),
2 May 2006,
as reported on Manumit Exchange, 2/5/06.
For full report, go to:

Postmodern rubbish, mumbo-jumbo, English Lite. Just what is going on in the nation's classrooms? Controversy erupted in Victoria last year when an "English Lite" curriculum was mooted, in which students could complete year 12 English by only studying two texts ("texts" meaning film and video as well as books). That proposal was overturned but there is still much debate about where the curriculum is heading.

A fortnight ago, Prime Minister John Howard attacked the study of English literature in Australia, based on postmodern ideology, as "rubbish". He's not the only one with a gripe. Last year a NSW English student complained to a newspaper about having to give feminist and Marxist interpretations of King Lear, and having to use psychoanalytical concepts in discussing the poetry of Gwen Harwood. "(You have to give a) feminist, then a structuralist, then a Freudian reading of most poems - it's crap, but you've got to play the game," wrote the year 12 student.

In 2005 Queensland Education Minister Rod Welford vowed to get rid of "postmodern mumbo-jumbo" in year 12 English after seeing sample student responses, including a "feminist" analysis of the fairytale Rapunzel, in which the student argued that Rapunzel was in fact a name for a vegetable also known as corn salad, and thus reinforced the notion of woman as a vegetable and being enslaved to routines such as cooking.

A 2003 survey of heads of university economics departments included comments such as: "Students are functionally illiterate because standards in Australian high schools have collapsed. Less than adequate English language standards and an inability to construct logical arguments are also problems for domestic students as well and suggest high school preparation is less adequate than, say, 25-30 years ago."

It is wrong to simply issue a call to go back to the past but perhaps a good place to start would be in putting test items on year 12 English exams that are similar to - perhaps identical to? - the ones that were used in the 1960s and '70s, and thus set the benchmark so that curriculum from all other school years could align with that. Clever countries can't be all that clever if they persist in keeping diminished curriculums and standards in English.


NZ: Fewer Kiwis saying 'I do'
22 May 2006,
as reported on Manumit Exchange, 22/5/06

While Swedish popstars Abba may have gushed "I do, I do, I do, I do" New Zealanders are increasingly saying "I don't". A general trend towards delaying marriage, a growth in de facto unions, and an increasing number of Kiwis living the single life has contributed to a drop in the number of couples tying the knot.

Figures released today by Statistics New Zealand for 2005 reveal that while the number of marriages has remained relatively stable, the marriage rate has dropped. The general marriage rate (marriages per 1000 unmarried adults) was 13.2 in 2005, down from 16.9 in 1995. The latest rate is less than a third of the peak level of 45.5 per 1000, recorded in 1971.

Last year there were 20,500 marriages registered. This figure is in line with the annual average number of marriages (20,600) over the last decade, and compares with an annual average of 25,200 during the period 1966-1975. The proportion of marriages where one or both partners had previously been married has remained stable at around 36 per cent over the last decade. Last year the number of remarriages was 7300, compared with 4400 in 1971. Around 90 per cent of those remarrying in 2005 had been divorced.

The Family Court granted 10,000 marriage dissolution orders in 2005, consistent with the annual average for the last decade. The divorce rate in 2005 (divorces per 1000 estimated existing marriages) was 12.4. An analysis of divorce rates by year of marriage shows around one third of New Zealanders who married in 1980 had divorced before their silver wedding anniversary (25 years). Nearly half of all marriages (45 per cent) that dissolved in 2005 involved children under 17 years of age. Of those divorces involving children, there was an average of 1.8 children per divorce, with little change in this figure during the past decade.

NZ: Girls chant 'kill him' in attack on driver
By Eleanor Wilson, The Press, 10 May 2006 as reported on Manumit Exchange, 10/5/06

"Kill him, kill him", a pack of teenage girls chanted as they viciously assaulted a Christchurch bus driver, punching him and kicking him until he lost consciousness. "It was open season. They were kicking and punching, saying 'Kick him' and 'Kill him' until I blacked out," bus driver Leslie Stringer said yesterday.

Stringer, 53, is recovering from a spinal injury at Burwood Hospital after being beaten unconscious on Saturday night. A bus driver for 20 years, he got out of his Leopard Coachlines Orbiter, after a missile was thrown, because he thought he had hit someone. "I didn't see two of them back in the dark. That's when I got the first punch in the head. Then they hit me in the small of the back and I went down," he said.

As Stringer, the father of a 14-year-old boy, fell to the ground, he could see others in the group running across the road to join in the attack. He recalls hearing the group of up to 15, mainly girls, aged 14 to 16, repeatedly egging each other on. "I think they went into a fighting frenzy," said Stringer, who is receiving counselling to help him cope with the ordeal. "They were just out to harm me."

Roelof was also dragged to the ground, and two supervisors who went to help him were bitten and punched. Stringer was taken to hospital in a neck brace with a suspected broken back and continues to suffer from dizzy spells. "When I was trying to get out of the gutter, I had no feeling from the waist down. It was the shock. The nervous system had shut down. I was a shaken mess," he said. The attackers, who took cash from both buses, would have escaped with "a substantial amount of money", he said.

Canada: Antidepressant suicide risk up five times for seniors
Medical Studies/Trials,
3 May 2006,
as reported on Manumit Exchange, 6/5/06

According to Canadian researchers seniors who are prescribed antidepressants such as Prozac, Paxil and Zoloft are almost five times more likely to commit suicide during the first month on the drugs than those given other medication to treat depression.

The new study adds to the controversy already surrounding popular selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors, or 'SSRI' drugs. Dr. David Juurlink, lead author of the study by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES), says doctors are far too liberal with such drugs. The authors linked population-based coroner's records with patient prescription records, doctors billing claims, and hospital data for more than 1.2 million Ontario residents 66 years of age and older from 1992 to 2000.

During the first month of therapy, SSRI antidepressants were associated with a five times higher risk of completed suicide than other antidepressants. That risk was independent of a recent diagnosis of depression or the receipt of psychiatric care, and suicides of a violent nature were distinctly more common during SSRI therapy. The study found three-quarters of the victims, over 66 years of age were men and most of those who took their own lives had not been prescribed antidepressants.

Juurlink says doctors should closely monitor seniors in the first month after they prescribe the medication, when the suicide risk is higher. Prior studies have found an increased prevalence of suicidal thoughts among children and teens taking the medication, but little research on the possible link to self-harm in elderly patients has been done. The researchers do say that drugs such as Prozac, Zoloft and Effexor are nevertheless essential for the most seriously depressed seniors and emphasise that the suicidal side effects are rare.

They believe an over-prescribing of SSRIs to older people who do not really need them may be exposing some to an unnecessary risk of self-harm. As the suicide risk appeared to level out among the different types of antidepressants after the initial month of treatment, the researchers suggest that the heightened suicide risk may have resulted from an adverse drug effect. Other experts say they are more concerned by the revelation that the majority of those who took their own lives had no drug treatment at all and demonstrates a massive under-treatment of the elderly.

USA: Divorce drops a person's wealth by 77 percent
For full report visit: //

A new nationwide study provides some of the best evidence to date of the devastating financial toll divorce can wreak on a person's wealth. The study of about 9,000 people found that divorce reduces a person's wealth by about three-quarters (77 percent) compared to that of a single person, while being married almost doubles comparative wealth (93 percent). And people who get divorced see their wealth begin to drop long before the decree becomes final.

"Divorce causes a decrease in wealth that is larger than just splitting a couple's assets in half," said Jay Zagorsky, author of the study and a research scientist at Ohio State University's Center for Human Resource Research. By the same token, married people see an increase in wealth that is more than just adding the assets of two single people.

"If you really want to increase your wealth, get married and stay married. On the other hand, divorce can devastate your wealth," Zagorsky said. Contrary to popular belief, the results showed that the wealth status of divorced women wasn't significantly worse than that of divorced men, in terms of real money. The findings appear in the current issue of the Journal of Sociology.

The study used data involving 9,055 people who participated in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, which is funded primarily by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The NLSY is a nationally representative survey of people nationwide conducted by Ohio State's Center for Human Resource Research.

For people who married and then divorced, there was a slow build-up of wealth during the early years of marriage and then a steady decline beginning about four years before divorce. Total wealth bottomed out the year prior to divorce, to an average of about $3,500.

The results also cast doubt on the common assumption that divorce is significantly harder financially on women than on men. After divorce, the typical man held 2.5 times the amount of wealth held by the typical woman. While this seems large in percentage terms, the difference in absolute dollars is relatively small - about $5,100.

The data in this study can't say why marriage is so helpful in building wealth, and why divorce so devastating, Zagorsky said. But sociological research offers some potential clues: Married people can benefit because two people can live more cheaply than they could separately. In addition, because two spouses can share household responsibilities, they can each produce more than if they were single. Divorced people have a variety of costs associated with the divorce, which increases how much they spend and decreases how much they can save, he said.

USA: Men are More Likely Than Women to Be Victims in Dating Violence

Life News (Social and Behavioral Sciences) Source: University of New Hampshire
as reported on Manumit Exchange, 24/5/06

Newswise - A 32-nation study of violence against dating partners by university partners found that about a third had been violent, and most incidents of partner violence involve violence by both the man and woman, according to Murray Straus, founder and co-director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire. The second largest category was couples where the female partner was the only one to carry about physical attacks, not the male partner.

Straus  new research also found that dominance by the female partner is even more closely related to violence by women than is male dominance. These results call into question the widely held belief that partner violence is primarily a male crime and that when women are violent it is self defense. In the 35 years since I began research on partner violence, I have seen my assumptions about prevalence and etiology contradicted by a mass of empirical evidence from my own research and from research by many others, Straus said. My view on partner violence now recognizes the overwhelming evidence that women assault their partners at about the same rate as men. However, when women are violent, the injury rate is lower.

Straus will present his controversial research at the Trends in Intimate\ Violence Intervention conference in New York City May 22-25, 2006. This research is part of the International Dating Violence Study, a multinational study of violence against dating partners by university students. A consortium of researchers around the world collected data from 13,601 students at 68 universities in 32 nations.

In the paper, Straus calls for an end to the focus on men as the only perpetrators of dating violence, saying the refusal to recognize the multi-causal nature of the problem is hampering the effort to end domestic violence and ignoring half the perpetrators. As recently as December 2005, the National Institute of Justice refused to consider applications for funding that dealt with male victims. Changes in policy that acknowledge men are not the only perpetrators of partner violence are needed immediately,  Straus said. It is time to make the prevention and treatment effort one that is aimed at ending all family violence, including spanking children, not just violence against women.

Straus is the author or co-author of more than 200 publications, including "Beating the Devil Out Of Them: Corporal Punishment By American Parents and Its Effects on Children." More information on the International Dating Violence Study and papers reporting results are available at .

Turkey: Judge killed over women

Thousands of people marched in Anakara last Thursday to demand that Turkey remains a secular state and not give in to Islamic fundamentalists. The mass protests were triggered by last week’s shooting of five judges, one of whom was killed when a gunman opened fire in court. The motive behind the attack was believed to be the judges’ rulings, banning women from wearing headscarves. Islamic headscarves, robes or beards may not be worn in state-run buildings, including universities, parliament and public offices. Graduates from Koranic schools are restricted from entering universities, while religious wedding ceremonies are not recognized.

Political moderates in Turkey has been trying to have their country admitted into the European Union. In order to gain acceptance within the EU, Turkey has agreed to abolish the death penalty, and modified its constitution several times, including reform of the penal code, institutionalization of women’s rights and improvement in its human rights record. (The Epoch Times, May 24-30, 2006. page 5.)

Comment pieces

Book review: Why Gender Matters: What Parents and Teachers Need to Know About the Emerging Science of Sex Differences
Reviewed by Mary Ward Menke

Are men smarter than women?

In Why Gender Matters: What Parents and Teachers Need to Know About the Emerging Science of Sex Differences, Dr. Leonard Sax says it's not a question of aptitude but of learning styles predicated by innate, hard-wired differences in male and female brains. Harvard President Lawrence Summers, take note.

By adhering to the dogma of "social constructionism," the belief that the differences between boys and girls are derived from social expectations, not biology, parents have been encouraged to foster nurturing in boys by letting them play with dolls, and to allow girls to play with erector sets to improve their spatial relations skills. Education abides by similar gender-blind guidelines: boys and girls should be taught the same lessons at the same time in the same manner. It is a question of nature versus nurture, or so we've been told.

A family practitioner and psychologist, Sax is convinced that this gender-blind philosophy of child-rearing and education has been less than successful, citing such evidence as the dramatic drop in male academic performance and the increase in female alcohol abuse over the past 20 years. Instead of pretending sex differences don't exist, he says we should take advantage of them. Single-sex education is a major step in the right direction.

In private practice, Sax saw a number of second and third grade boys who had been referred for testing for Attention Deficit Disorder. He recalled a series of Penn State studies done during the 1950s and 1960s indicating that females hear better than males. Since most elementary school teachers are women, and the referred students were boys, Sax wondered whether anyone had considered placing the boys in front of the classroom. He learned that school administrators and teachers were unaware of gender differences in hearing.

Determined to write a book regarding gender differences, Sax began researching available literature on the topic of child development. He discovered that most books were based less on fact and more on their authors' personal beliefs or political agenda "... either to deny innate sex differences or use sex differences in child development as a justification for maintaining traditional sex roles." He decided to write a book based on actual research:
I made myself a promise .... Every statement I make about sex differences will be supported by good science in peer-reviewed journals.

True to his promise, Why Gender Matters is substantiated by a 45-page bibliography of documented scientific research. In addition to hearing ability, studies indicate dissimilarities in eye anatomy, suggesting that "girls are born prewired to be interested in faces while boys are prewired to be more interested in moving objects." Other research shows that different areas of the brain develop in a different sequence in boys and girls. For example, a two-year old boy is three times more likely than a girl to be able to build a bridge out of blocks, while a three-and-a-half year old girl can interpret facial expressions better than a five-year-old boy. All differences are larger and more important in childhood than in adulthood, Sax concludes.

Because of the hard-wired differences, Sax believes gender-blind education does more harm than good: ... gender-blind education has not ameliorated gender differences in important educational outcomes ... it has exacerbated them. A smaller proportion of boys now study ... advanced foreign languages, art and music, and a smaller proportion of girls study advanced math, computer science, and physics.

Research indicates single-sex education is more likely to break down gender stereotypes: There is now very strong evidence that girls are more likely to take courses such as computer science and physics in girls-only schools ... boys in single sex schools are more than twice as likely to study art, music, foreign languages, and literature...

Why Gender Matters isn't restricted to a discussion of learning styles. Sax also addresses discipline, risk-taking, aggression, sex and drug use and shows how boys and girls react differently to similar situations. Sax presents a reader-friendly, persuasive argument, challenging many basic assumptions by interspersing hard data with numerous case studies. In the end, Why Gender Matters is confirmation of what many already knew: There really is a difference. (April 2005).

Mary Ward Menke is a contributing editor to January Magazine and the owner of WordAbilities, LLC, providing writing and editing services to businesses and individuals. Her work has been published in The Toastmaster, Dog Fancy and Science of Mind magazines, in the Suburban Journals (a weekly St. Louis community newspaper) and on

Are Women Earning More Than Men?
By Warren Farrell,,
12 May 2006 as reported on Manumit Exchange, 14/5/06

When I was on the board of directors for the National Organization for Women in New York City during the 1970s, I led protests against the pay gap. I wore a "59 Cents" pin to reflect my objection to the discrimination I felt was the cause of women earning only 59 cents to each dollar earned by men. Now, since I'm a husband and father, discrimination against women isn't just political, it's personal.

But one question haunted me through the years: If an employer has to pay a man one dollar for the same work a woman would do for 59 cents, why would anyone hire a man? If women do produce more for less, I thought, women who own their own businesses should earn more than male business owners. So I checked. I found that women entrepreneurs earn 50% less than their male counterparts.

It's not that women are less effective or productive - they just have different priorities. A 2001 survey of business owners with M.B.A.s conducted by the Rochester Institute of Technology found that money was the primary motivator for only 29% of women, versus 76% of men. Women prioritized flexibility, fulfillment, autonomy and safety.

After more than a decade of research for my book, Why Men Earn More, I discovered that men and women make 25 work-life choices that actually create a wage gap. Men make decisions that result in their making more money. On the other hand, women make decisions that earn them better lives (e.g., more family and friend time).

But what happens when women make the same lucrative decisions typically made by men? The good news - for women, at least: Women actually earn more. For example, when a male and a female civil engineer both stay with their respective companies for ten years, travel and relocate equally and take the same career risks, the woman ends up making more. And among workers who have never been married and never had children, women earn 117% of what men do. (This factors in education, hours worked and age.)

Without husbands, women have to focus on earning more. They work longer hours, they're willing to relocate and they're more likely to choose higher-paying fields like technology. Without children, men have more liberty to earn less - that is, they are free to pursue more fulfilling and less lucrative careers, like writing or art or teaching social studies.

What about the headlines saying that even when their jobs are the same, men get paid more than women? Isn't that especially true in corporate America? Yes. But according to Catalyst, a nonprofit that advocates for gender equality in the business world, men are nine times more likely to be responsible for bottom-line sales, marketing and finances, not human resources or public relations.

But wait. Don't companies favor men for these greater responsibilities to begin with? Sometimes. Overall, though, track records being equal, whoever is more willing to relocate, travel and work 80-hour weeks receives greater responsibilities. The male corporate model is built on a man's greater willingness to be a slave of sorts - especially once he has to provide for children.

Is there discrimination against women? Yes. There's no denying that the old boys' network is alive and well. But there's also discrimination against men. For example, try getting hired as a male dental hygienist, nursery school teacher or cocktail waiter, or try selling clothing at Wal-Mart Stores. (Even the employees in the men's wear department are 93% women.) When we focus our binoculars only on discrimination, we miss opportunities available to women, such as the 80 fields (e.g., financial analysis, radiation therapy, statistics and most engineering fields) in which women now earn more than men. I want my daughters to know that working 44 versus 34 hours per week leads to more than twice the pay. As I took my binoculars off of discrimination against my wife and daughters, I discovered new opportunities in store for them.

Dr. Warren Farrell is the author of Why Men Earn More: The Startling Truth Behind the Pay Gap - and What Women Can Do About It and the international best-sellers Why Men Are The Way They Are and The Myth of Male Power. Dr. Farrell is the only man in the U.S. ever elected three times to the board of directors for the National Organization for Women in New York City.


Has Matriarchy made the sexes equal?
By Carey Roberts
Carey Roberts
iFeminists, 24 May 2006
as reported on Manumit Exchange, 26/5/06

A number of years ago someone came up with the idea that Patriarchy was the cause of untold misery and hardship of women. So why not let the ladies run the show for awhile and see if they can clean up the mess?

That idea began to take root, and on January 20, 1993, the Matriarchy came into power. That's the day the Rodham-Clinton co-presidency checked into the White House. After thirteen years of social engineering designed to advance the feminist agenda, we can ask, Are we now closer to the long-awaited gender utopia? To answer that question, we might first note that despite its widely-publicized shortcomings, the Patriarchy had at least a few redeeming features. Women have long enjoyed special consideration by chivalrous lawmakers. For example, women were exempted from the military draft and spared from the most hazardous occupations.

Because of their longer life spans, females were favored by government programs such as Social Security and Medicare. The eligibility criteria for welfare programs such as Medicaid gave preference to custodial parents, another nod to mothers. Such multi-billion dollar programs, we might note, were largely conceived, enacted, and paid for by those linear-thinking patriarchs. Like socialism, Matriarchy avers to be an enlightened and egalitarian form of social order. Let's probe that claim. We'll start with abortion. When feminists pushed to legalize the procedure, did they envision that fathers and pregnant women would be equal in their decision-making? Hardly. The feminists harsh refrain was our bodies, ourselves.

When Carol Gilligan and her comrades pushed for the 1994 Gender Equity in Education Act a law that cast the spotlight on the needs of schoolgirls - did they mention that boys had always lagged on tests of reading achievement? Not to my recollection. When president Bill Clinton named hard-Left feminist Norma Cantu as director of the Department of Education civil rights office, she became obsessed about the under-representation of girls in college sports programs. But did she ever worry about the under-representation of boys on dean's lists and honor societies? Not on your life! When Hillary Clinton lobbied behind the scenes for the Violence against Women Act, did she ever muse about the well-known fact that men, too, are often victims of domestic violence? Nope.

And when the former First Lady advocated for women's health, did she ever comment on the odd fact that men were dying 6 years earlier than women? Well, I guess I missed that speech. Not to pile on HRC too much, but when she stumps for her Paycheck Fairness Act, does she ever mention the glass ceiling that keeps men from working fewer hours, accepting less stressful jobs, and retiring at an earlier age, as their wives often do? Ditto on that one. When the Lavender Ladies lobbied to stiffen penalties for non-payment of child support, did they ever address the problem of custodial moms who blocked their exes from seeing their own kids? Answer in the negative.

When feminists speak about child custody, do they espouse the rhetoric of equality and fairness? Not in New York, at least, where last month feminists lobbied ferociously against a bill that would have allowed an equal presumption of joint custody. So despite all the feminist hoopla about gender equality, it is difficult to find even a single example where reality measures up to rhetoric. Alexis de Tocqueville was a political thinker who charted the early stirrings of socialism in the years following the French Revolution.

Tocqueville sagely noted, Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude. In 1831 Tocqueville journeyed to the United States to study our nascent democracy. Noting similar socialistic yearnings in America, he made this prescient observation:

”There are people in Europe who, confounding together the different characteristics of the sexes, would make man and woman into beings not only equal but alike. They would give to both the same functions, impose on both the same duties, and grant to both the same rights; they would mix them in all things - their occupations, their pleasures, their business. It may readily be conceived that by thus attempting to make one sex equal to the other, both are degraded, and from so preposterous a medley of the works of nature nothing could ever result but weak men and disorderly women.” Weak men and disorderly women an apt description of how things stand in America, circa 2006.

Research shows how hormones wire minds of men, women
By Ronald Kotulak, Chicago Tribune
22 May 2006,
as reported on Mamumit Exchange, 27/5/06.

CHICAGO - Scientists are still a long way from figuring out what women and men really want, but they are getting a lot closer to understanding what makes their brains so different. That women and men think differently has little to do with whether they are handed dolls or trucks to play with as infants. After all, when infant monkeys are given a choice of human toys, females prefer dolls and males go after cars and trucks.

The differences, researchers are beginning to discover, appear to have a lot more to do with how powerful hormones wire the female and male brain during early development and later in life. Among the newest findings: A previously unknown hormone appears to launch puberty's sexual and mental transformation; growth hormone is made in the brain's memory center at rates up to twice as high in females as in males; and the brain's hot button for emotions, the amygdala, is wired to different parts of the brain in women and men.

Scientists hope the findings may help explain such mysteries as why women are often more verbal, more socially empathetic, more nurturing and more susceptible to depression, while men tend to be more aggressive, more outdoorsy, more focused on things than people and more vulnerable to alcohol and drug addiction. "Males and females look different, we act different, so of course our brains are different," said Rutgers University psychologist Tracey Shors, who is studying the effects of growth hormone on the brain. "Sex hormones, along with stress and growth hormones, change the brain's anatomy, and in that way you change behavior, your ability to think and learn."

Sex differences begin with the X and Y sex chromosomes a person is born with. But scientists now think that whether the brain and nervous system are wired as female or male depends a lot on the early influence of estrogen, the so-called female hormone, or testosterone, the male hormone. The brain's sexual identity is first established when those hormones are briefly released before and shortly after birth, which may influence a child's preference for dolls or trucks.

"There's a peak of testosterone in males at birth that's very important for future sexual behavior," said Dr. Sophie Messager, of Paradigm Therapeutics in Cambridge, England. "If you block that, the male rats behave like females for the rest of their life." The sex hormones then lie dormant until they get turned on again in puberty to make the body ready for reproduction. That is where a recently discovered hormone called kisspeptin comes in. Created in the brain, it unleashes a cascade of hormones that race down to the gonads - ovaries in females and testes in males.

There they stimulate the production of estrogen or testosterone, starting the physical transformations of puberty. Messager proved in animals that blocking kisspeptin prevented those changes from happening. But there is another target for this activity: the brain. The hormonal downrush kicked off by kisspeptin comes full circle when estrogen and testosterone travel back to the brain, imprinting neural circuits with female and male characteristics, Messager said.

"The bias of mainstream neuroscience for the past 25 years has been, 'OK, sure there's some sex differences way down deep in the brain in this little structure called the hypothalamus, but otherwise the brains of men and women were pretty much the same,' " said Larry Cahill, a neurobiologist at the University of California, Irvine. "That was wrong, as wrong as could be," said Cahill, who is using imaging technology to show how male and female brains are wired for emotions. "Sex matters a lot in how the brain works, and we neuroscientists have to change our tune."

Cahill and his colleagues found that the amygdala works differently in men and women, which may help explain why women are more likely to develop mood disorders such as depression and men are more prone to alcoholism and drug abuse. In one experiment, Cahill showed that when men and women watched the same emotional movie, the right side of the amygdala was more active in men, and the left amygdala was more active in women. "They're using very different brain processes to create enhanced memories," he said. The right amygdala is more in tune to the outside environment, communicating with the visual cortex, which controls vision, and the striatum, which coordinates motor actions. These processes are thought to be key to spatial orientation -- knowing how to negotiate your surroundings, as in hunting.

The left amygdala is concentrated more on the inner environment of the body, connecting with the insular cortex, which produces emotionally relevant content from sensory experiences, and the hypothalamus' regulation of the body's metabolic and autonomic activities. Scientists speculate that this is important for the female capacity for nurturing.

Roles of men, women matter of biology

By Lynn Kargol / Columnist Echo Online. Eastern Michigan University,
9 May 2006

Scores of stereotypes and cultural expectations surround the roles of men and women, but what is actually at the root of being masculine or feminine? The debate between environment and biology is still raging, and everyone seems to have a different opinion. Are men better or more capable than women? Can women do anything men can do? And what exactly are gender roles, anyway?

Gender roles are behavioral norms associated with males and females in a social group. A popular belief is that a person's gender is defined by culture, and therefore is capable of changing. However, multiple scientific
studies purport to show the biological causes of acting "feminine" or "masculine."

The biggest biological push to act a certain way is driven by sex hormones: primarily testosterone for males and estrogen for females. These chemicals exist in vastly different proportions between the sexes, and they have an obviously large impact on our behavior. Simon Baron-Cohen, a psychology professor at Cambridge, states the "female brain is predominantly hard-wired for empathy, while the male brain is predominantly hard-wired for understanding or building systems."

Besides the differences in sex hormones, men and women are also unique in how their brains process information. Professor Robert Nadeau, wrote "differences in the sex-specific human brain condition a wide range of behaviors that we typically associate with maleness or femaleness" in Brain Sex and the Language of Love. He says the male brain is better wired for special and math skills while the female brain is more skilled in language and reading.

I believe that the way males and females behave is deeply rooted in our genetic design. Sure, culture may play a role in reinforcing those behaviors, but they are only supporting traits that were already there. For example, women are typically more empathetic and emotional than men. They have a stronger drive to nurture children and are generally more passive. But is this really because they have been suppressed and objectified by men? Women are simply wired differently, and have special abilities that tend to lead them towards nurturing professions such as teaching, nursing, and so on. The stereotypes of particularly "male" or "female" jobs are founded on real biological causes.

So can women take on traditional male professions just as well? My answer is sometimes. I believe women are equally as smart as men, and are capable of working their way up to the highest positions just as a man could. Yet, there are certain jobs that women aren't as well cut out for such as firefighting, combat fighting, and certain police work. Men are generally faster, more muscular and have higher endurance levels than women, factors that can mean life or death in certain careers. For these types of jobs, women should be offered positions where less physical strength is needed to get the job done efficiently.

The main issue that needs to be recognized is that men and women are different but equal. Instead of whining about how our differences are unfair or simply trying to deny their existence, I think we should celebrate them while maintaining a focus on our respective abilities. Just because a man makes a better fighter and a woman is more adept to multitasking activities doesn't make one superior. It's important to say that many of men and women's abilities do overlap. There are countless talents, occupations, and personality traits that both men and women can share. The problem arises when women try to become masculine just because they feel inferior or vice versa.

If people would acknowledge our differences instead of getting caught up in a giant game of "who's better," we would all be a lot happier and more efficient. The differences that exist between men and women only serve to compliment each other and make us each more "specialized," rather than better or worse.

See also: Women designed to multi-task.

Humour: 13 differences between men and women

1. Names:

If Laurie, Linda, Elizabeth and Barbara go out for lunch, they will call each other Laurie, Linda, Elizabeth and Barbara.

If Mark, Chris, Eric and Tom go out, they will affectionately refer to each other as Fat Boy, Godzilla, Peanut-Head and Scrappy.

2. Eating out:
When the bill arrives, Mark, Chris, Eric and Tom will each throw in a $10, even though it's only for $32.50. None of them will have anything smaller and none will actually admit they want the change back.

When the women get their bill, out come the pocket calculators.

3. Money:
A man will pay $2 for a $1 item he needs.

A woman will pay $1 for a $2 item that she doesn't need but it's on sale.

4. Bathrooms:
A man has five items in his bathroom: a toothbrush, shaving cream, razor, a bar of soap, and a towel from the Marriott.

The average number of items in the typical woman's bathroom is 337. A man would not be able to identify most of these items.

5. Arguments:
A woman has the last word in any argument.

Anything a man says after that is the beginning of a new argument.

6. Cats:
Women love cats.

Men say they love cats, but when women aren't looking, men kick cats.

7. Future:
A woman worries about the future until she gets a husband.

A man never worries about the future until he gets a wife.

8. Success:
A successful man is one who makes more money than his wife can spend.

A successful woman is one who can find such a man.

9. Marriage:
A woman marries a man expecting he will change, but he doesn't.

A man marries a woman expecting that she won't change and she does.

10. Dressing up:
A woman will dress up to go shopping, to water the plants, empty the garbage, answer the phone, read a book, and read the mail.

A man will dress up for weddings and funerals.

11. Natural:
Men wake up as good-looking as they went to bed.

Women somehow deteriorate during the night.

12. Offspring:
Ah, children. A woman knows all about her children. She knows about dentist appointments and teenage crushes, best friends, favourite foods, secret fears and hopes and dreams.

A man is sometimes aware of some other people living in the house.

13. Final thought:
Any married man should forget his mistakes.

There's no use in two people remembering the same thing!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Quote "The inaugural National

Submitted by davistown on Mon, 01/01/2007 - 00:01.

Quote "The inaugural National Forum on Men and Suicide wrapped up with a commitment to tackle the tragedy of male suicide. The Mental Health Council of Australia said that, with governments turning their attention to the mental health crisis, now was the time to address suicide prevention. "The forum has laid the foundation for fundamental change in the way Australian society deals with men and suicide," said the council's chief executive, John Mendoza.

"The forum set out a clear long term-goal that by 2030 all Australians will know what actions to take individually and collectively to prevent suicide. "The bold plan developed by the forum aims that, in one generation, suicide will no longer exist as a health risk for men."
what???? how they going to stamp out suicide im all ears if they can but way they talking they wont. they acting it like something that with a bit of a chat suicide will dissapear come on. obviously the people who come up with these ideas have never been their not that i recemend them going their. their are many reasons for suicide stemming in my experience from a feeling of being out of control in a situation whether it a friend being kidnapped by the australian governments nazi agencys or from women leaving their husbands for another guy taking the kids making lies so they man can never see his kids again, wether if from a mental illness causes by a chemical inbalance in the brain. their are many factors contributing to male suicide. Women went on their holy crusades to get equal opportunitys but ended up with the world run and ruled by feminists. i agree with women voting and everything and being equal at getting work but come on. Offur a women a job she dont want chances are she will say no thats a mans job eg plumbers, welders, anything heavy and dirty, have a guy want to get into some of the jobs and women say no thats a womens job unless she dont want it. you see ads for jobs where they ask for a female and that equal but if a ad asks for a man it unequal. men are being expected to do more provide more work more to earn more to keep the family running with prices of eveything going up but the women also wants a life of going out. come on their is so much stress placed on males of which the majority of females laugh at.
politicians need to be taught as well when they get up and say their fav lines when speaking bout mental health as "in x amount of year mental health will be the biggest burdon on society" it just helps me so much
you see i suffer from a mental disorder and was born with it. i am fighting it i am doing everything i can to overcome my problems with many types of potions, drugs, natural stuff, im willing for anything but i still have my bad days and i had an apprenticeship i was sacked from due to my mental condition.. it easy to say that descrimination but i can see my boss's side. i was spaced out on prescribed drugs that made me drowsy. drs wouldnt listen to my concerns so i would be at work drowsy till after lunch when it started to wear off but when working on heavy machinery with oxy torches (devices with a flame used for cutting through metal) heating torches (devices with hot flame used to heat metal to red hot so can be bent) welding devices that leave metal red hot which in my drugged out state i would grab bare handed. i was a danger to myself and to others and he had no choice but to lay me off. which drove me to point of suicide.
their are many things that cause suicide and in males it the stress of familys, knowing if you mess up your wife may leave with your children and you may never see them again, their so many things that contribute to suicide. not many people who commit suicide want to die they just cant see a way out. so having people telling u dont worry be happy, or the best is round the corner, or tomorrow is another day after your wife has left u lost ur kids no jobs and have a mental illness that effecting you just doesnt help. You need medications. Also as much as society says it acceptable majority of males find it hard to talk. 2 girls walking down street chatting then they hug nothing more is said or thought. 2 guys walking down street and hug and one upset people think they gay (not that i have anything against gay people as i have friends who are gay)
their to many problems for me to see them being able to say they will stamp out male suicide
if they said drop the suicide rate in males then yes i might see their point and agree but not stamp it out completely.
also why wait till 2030 why not start now. have a chat to your friends let them know you care. be nice to a stranger (people may think it strange or weird but if someone upset on train a stranger i ask if i can help) take the time to help this is a busy world but take the time to care. what is more important getting to work 10 mins early so u can get ur coffee?? getting to that train on time and ignoring a person who needs help? or helping someone. you never know what a smile may do. slow down your life take time to smile at a stranger, wave say hello, if person upset u ask for help they say they it ok then dont pester them but be nearbye if on same train. if you have spare change give some to a homeless guy sure he might spend it on alohol or smokes but think bout urself dont u smoke and drink alcohol. show people you care. if you have a friend you know is on their own then phone them up say hi. send a sms saying u thinking of them who cares may sound dorky but u never know how the person at other end is.
their are a number of telemarketers who have phoned peoples mobiles and got them and talked to them and when asked how they are have found the person about to jump in front of a car to commit suicide. well forget bout ur boss, forget bout the other calls on the line take the time be friendly forget ur sales pitch be friendly. dont tell them they silly cuz it will make them feel worse.
PLEASE i know cuz ive been through suicide attempts ive had people tell me to snap out of it, had people say the great come on suck it in your a man (which i should point out does NOT help), grow up. smile be happy, the people who helped me the most are those who were quiet supporters they didnt necessarilly know i was suicidal they sent me a random sms saying they thinking of me, or a friend just randomly giving me a hug not saying things will get better but saying im their for u. it not about what u can say it is how you can listen.
PLEASE lets slow down the suicide rate slow down our lives and take the time to care about another.

Stampout Male Suicide by 2030?

Submitted by djama on Mon, 21/08/2006 - 16:16.

This has disturbing echoes of Bob Hawkes' famous 'no child will live in poverty by 1990' to me. One of the major factors in Male suicide is the destruction of their relationships with their children by their ex-wives after break-up. This is called by psychologists 'relational aggression' ie violence which targets relationships as distinct from violence which targets people. Relational aggression is recognised as a major if not the primary form of female aggression (Crick and Grotpeter 1995 & Odd Girl Out - Rachel Simmons) however it is NEVER taken into consideration by the powers that be.

There will never be a significant inroad into male suicide until there is a major recognition and address of this type of female violence however, in the current 'feminist' environment women are above criticism when it comes to acts of violence on men.

The most disturbing aspect of this form of violence however is not that it leads to the suicide of so many men but when a woman poisons the relationship between a child and their father they also poison the child and it leads to many child suicides as well.



Advertise here!

All content and comments posted are owned and © by the Author and/or Poster.
Web site Copyright © 1995 - 2007 Clemens Vermeulen, Cairns - All Rights Reserved
Drupal design and maintenance by Clemens Vermeulen Drupal theme by Kiwi Themes.
Buy now